loke wrote:As said before, the F-35 is such a much better deal than the others that there will be no excitement.

I am struggling to see why Dassault and Eurofighter bother to participate. They are both more expensive and less capable, in particular the Typhoon has many weak points. Why would anybody pay more to get less (unless there is a political angle)

I am also not sure why Boeing is bothering with this. Roughly the same cost but much less capable.

The only thing that can prevent F-35 from winning would be some very surprising political development over the next few years, that would compell Finland to buy European instead of US. For instance if Trump is pulling the US out of Europe/NATO, and the EU responds with creating their own defence alliance. Perhaps then the pressure from Brussels would become too big for Finland to ignore.

Otherwise, I do not see this happening.

I think after a few more sales of the F-35. The writing will pretty much be on the wall and the fighter market for 4.5 Generation Fighters will quickly tank!

lrrpf52 wrote:I've seen a Russian low-level flight with my own eyes out on a lake near Joutsa in the summer of 2010.

Probably flight to an air show in Tampere. Makes zero sense otherwise.

Pretty much ; I know a Flanker is recognizable and I don't question your ID skills. But considering this was a reconnaissance penetration flight is frankly hair stretched. Makes even less sense considering Joutsa is 40-ish nm away from Tikkakoski and its C2 assets. There also was LLv 21 at Pirkkala at the time... You can be certain such a flight would have created a big fuss.

There was an airshow in Pirkkala in July or August 2010, by the way.

A single fighter has never had the AWACS capability that the F-35 does, so that is what I was referring to regarding unprecedented regional SA for the Finnish Air Force, not US and Swedish Air Force assets that aren't OPCON to FiAF.

F-35 has a quite remarkable SA bubble, but it cannot substitute an AWACS, come on..

A single fighter has never had the AWACS capability that the F-35 does, so that is what I was referring to regarding unprecedented regional SA for the Finnish Air Force, not US and Swedish Air Force assets that aren't OPCON to FiAF.

F-35 has a quite remarkable SA bubble, but it cannot substitute an AWACS, come on..

Some of those who have flown it has actually referred to it as a "mini AWACS"...

It cannot substitute an AWACS but not all countries can afford an AWACS!

A single fighter has never had the AWACS capability that the F-35 does, so that is what I was referring to regarding unprecedented regional SA for the Finnish Air Force, not US and Swedish Air Force assets that aren't OPCON to FiAF.

F-35 has a quite remarkable SA bubble, but it cannot substitute an AWACS, come on..

Some of those who have flown it has actually referred to it as a "mini AWACS"...

It cannot substitute an AWACS but not all countries can afford an AWACS!

I fully agree with you loke! For example how many NATO countries have their own AWACS? (this is a rhetoric question, BTW)

Or resuming, the F-35 will significantly bolster "AWACS capabilities" for those (most) countries that don't have their own dedicated AWACS aircraft.

A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.

lrrpf52 wrote:Either way, Finnish Air Defense isn't going to report every penetration of their airspace in the open, especially if it's NOE.

Nope. They have a practice of reporting exactly every airspace violation in public.

Yes, air refueling would be a luxury. Now the capability is maintained for international practices and Nato compatibility (NEL) since AF unit is occasionally allocated to JEF and other international response duties.

Last week two Hornets came back from USA after almost a year there for JASSM integration and test launches. They used Omega Tanker, which is a private company that offers air refueling services.

Affording to maintain F-35Bs could be trickier problem than buying them. There's quite a big push to get "64" since the whole country is meant to be defended, at least officially.

lrrpf52 wrote:Either way, Finnish Air Defense isn't going to report every penetration of their airspace in the open, especially if it's NOE.

Nope. They have a practice of reporting exactly every airspace violation in public.

Exactly. Besides Finland was then already filled with cameras and a lot of people would recognize a Sukhoi or MiG and would also know that NOE flying was something very much out of the ordinary. There is just no way this kind of activity would stay secret in Finland.

Do not agree. Gripen is not toast unless it loses in Sweden, which it will not. There is also Indian competition vs F-16, which can go either way really regardless of the planes' capabilities.

Agreed. It's going to become operational in Sweden, almost no matter what. E-model might get some small orders from smaller Air Forces just like original Gripen. Making a decent showing in Finnish competition would be beneficial for that.

Do not agree. Gripen is not toast unless it loses in Sweden, which it will not. There is also Indian competition vs F-16, which can go either way really regardless of the planes' capabilities.

Agreed. It's going to become operational in Sweden, almost no matter what. E-model might get some small orders from smaller Air Forces just like original Gripen. Making a decent showing in Finnish competition would be beneficial for that.

I think there is also a very high likelyhood it becomes operational in Brazil. Brazil may open other doors in Latin America.